Britpop : Time For Reevaluation?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1583 of them)

Okay, but generally speaking, those grants are not for new bands such as YSPWSD because you must have specialized training in your field and have to already be recognised as a professional musician by your peers (two of the requirements). It's tricky for a new band to comply with those requirements.

However, my point was that in some ways indie music IS subsidized.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:49 (nineteen years ago)

If it's so tricky to get one, then how the heck did a little tiny indie band like mine manage to get one? (Unless things have changed dramatically in the past 5 years.)

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:51 (nineteen years ago)

By the way, I know Shimura Curves got played on my station a while back, partly because it scored 3 out of 4 of the CRTC requirements.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:52 (nineteen years ago)

Xpost - I'll admit I don't really know what those grants are all about other than what I've heard through the grapevine. I know a couple of people who have been turned down for those reasons I stated. I've never applied for one and don't know that much about it. So, I bow to your superior experience.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:56 (nineteen years ago)

This wasn't Shimura Curves, this was the Lollies - who were totally MAPL by the book despite my passport.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 17:58 (nineteen years ago)

Oh sure. I'm talking only about 3 or 4 months ago we played Shimura Curves a couple of times. The Fem-con requirement is very new by the way - it only came in about a year ago.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:01 (nineteen years ago)

Kate played in two countries on radio. Next stop THE WORLD!

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:02 (nineteen years ago)

I can't imagine a similar system being implemented in the UK, much though I might think that was a good thing. Though I don't think I would give the money to the arists, but more to keep legendary venues going with Arts Council grants. You look at a super-isolated and yet still historically very vibrant UK indie scene, such as Hull for example - and it's usually down to a venue or a promoter doing everything they can to keep live music alive, not just in terms of local music, but attracting national bands and getting local bands in as support. In Hull that was the Adelphi - bands had a place to play, rehearse, record, half the bands in Hull worked behind the bar at one point or another to pay their rent. Something like that keeps a music scene vibrant on a grass roots level on a way that just giving grants to musicians doesn't.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:03 (nineteen years ago)

Hooray! I am in the elite cadre of ILXors who've played at the Adelphi.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:04 (nineteen years ago)

x-post, yay! I love Canadian radio!

(Four countries, actually - UK, Germany, Canada and US. Unless Texas counts as a different country...)

The Canadian system, despite its problems, does have a lot to be said for it. But then again, Canadian radio is localised in a way that UK radio is monolithic - the monolithic status of UK radio has some things to be said for it, too, though.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:05 (nineteen years ago)

But having grants available doesn't stop those kind of grassroots/collective scenes from happening. The relative isolation of most Canadian cities usually means there is a very strong and supportive local scene too.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (nineteen years ago)

The female artists rule seems weird tho. I would guestimate that women are in no way under-represented in Pop, at least.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (nineteen years ago)

(xxxpost, obviously)

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:09 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think the female artists rule seems weird at all - though I think it's aimed at redressing the balance in rock rather than pop, which is still overwhelmingly male.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:10 (nineteen years ago)

FYI the fem-con thing has only been taken on by those stations who want to support it as a concept. It's not fully official yet. Seems to work pretty well, though, having lived with it for a year. And I was originally sceptical.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:10 (nineteen years ago)

Agreed about Rock, yes - although why not set all sorts of quotas? - but I assumed that most stations would play some version of Pop and then it all seems a bit pointless. I don't like this protectionist thing anyway tho.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:14 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know if I like protectionism or not, but you can't deny that the Canadian independent music scene is really healthy in a way that I don't really think the UK is at the moment.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

If indie bands were forced to get girls in bands just to be played on radio then The Lex would have to like more indie bands!

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:19 (nineteen years ago)

I think the idea that the UK indie scene is unhealthy is probably wrong. As people have said upthread "NME bands" does not equal the indie scene in toto.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

Compared to what it's like in Canada - the amount of radio play, press coverage (mainstream press coverage), etc. that indie bands get, it is unhealthy. NME/Carling rock has an unhealthy stranglehold on the public face of UK indie, which is not at all representative of the actual creativity going on.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:26 (nineteen years ago)

The NME scene is unhealthy creatively but very very healthy commercially. If all those bands died on their arse would NME start covering decent bands again or just hype up some new shit and hope it takes off commercially?
If you read about a band in NME these days you can bet the will be in The Sun etc pretty quickly and played on R1.
Mind you, as Doherty proves, you don't have to have people knowing your music to get famous.
Do any bands get mega without being tabloid fodder?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:26 (nineteen years ago)

I can't imagine Snow Patrol provide many thrilling tabloid stories.

― Noodle Vague, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:27 (nineteen years ago)

To all the musicians on here: would subsidies actually help your bands?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:29 (nineteen years ago)

It's more than just "subsidies" though (and let me again say that I doubt that many bands receive cash handouts).

Having lived in both the UK and Canada for many years, I have to say that the Canadian music scene is larger, more eclectic, more inclusive, more friendly and more entertaining than the UK. There are lots of musicians of all ages who can easily find gigs, get media exposure, are supported by music fans of all ages. People just DO more here, and are much less judgemental/ageist/fashion-concious.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:31 (nineteen years ago)

Do you have to be under a certain age though? Do over 40s get help for example?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

Subsidising music or musicians wouldn't make a difference to me at my point in life. Subsidising venues and promoters would probably make more of a difference to me, to create more places for my band to play without dealing with awful moneygrubbing promoters. The difference for me would be playing somewhere that has a "get 20 people in the door with flyers" policy vs. someone who has the expertise and time and devotion to actually put together a good club, good bills and actually *promote* - that would be make a difference to me.

I know this may appear to be backwards thinking, as a musician, but honestly, it's not.

I mean, the difference between playing somewhere like the Bull and Gate and playing somewhere like the Windmill really shows this up. Which is a more pleasant -and profitable - experience for bands and fans?

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:35 (nineteen years ago)

There are lots of musicians of all ages who can easily find gigs, get media exposure, are supported by music fans of all ages.

WHY do you think this is? It's because someone is out there protecting this stuff, and not letting legendary venues be knocked down to build blocks of flats, not letting music papers be sold off to giant media empires who care about nothing but what shifts units, music fans having access to music that stimulates them through radio that actually plays local, independent music, etc. etc. etc.

― Masonic Boom, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:40 (nineteen years ago)

And would subsidies get spread locally from region to region? That would be one way to keep bands from moving to London I suppose, but then would they still get signed?

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

xpost. Ha-ha. I WISH. You know, almost every well-known venue in Vancouver has closed it's doors over the last 10 years. Some new places have sprung up, yes, but mostly we have nice shiny condos in what used to be great rock-n-roll clubs. Thing is there are always people willing to try putting gigs on in new venues. All ages shows, cafes, restaurants, weird little pubs etc. People just love live music here.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:45 (nineteen years ago)

"Do you have to be under a certain age though? Do over 40s get help for example?"

Well, the most influential thing is the Can-con requirements and all musicians benefit from that. As for these grants, my understanding is that they are specifically tailored for more experienced musicians who are already professionals.

here: http://www.canadacouncil.ca/grants/music/se127227196662968750.htm

Back in the day in the UK, the indie scene could have been said to have been subsidised by Unemployment Benefits. I know many, many bands spent years on the dole while cutting classic albums for Rough Trade etc.

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 18:54 (nineteen years ago)

"I haven't actually heard any music by The Horrors. That's probably in their favour just now. Are they as bad as I imagine?

Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy on Friday, 9 March 2007 17:19 (2 hours ago)"

I like them, much better than The Arctic Kooks View.

― zeus, Friday, 9 March 2007 19:51 (nineteen years ago)

WHY do you think this is? It's because someone is out there protecting this stuff, and not letting legendary venues be knocked down to build blocks of flats

Yeah, who cares about affordable housing, what's important is that Runrig have somewhere to finish their next 25 date tour.

― Dom Passantino, Friday, 9 March 2007 19:58 (nineteen years ago)

It IS important, actually. And it's not like they're gonna be building council flats where the Hammersmith Palais used to be, is it?

― everything, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:01 (nineteen years ago)

WHY do you think this is? It's because someone is out there protecting this stuff, and not letting legendary venues be knocked down to build blocks of flats, not letting music papers be sold off to giant media empires who care about nothing but what shifts units, music fans having access to music that stimulates them through radio that actually plays local, independent music, etc. etc. etc.

hahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahah
*breath*
hahahahaahhaa

― JW, Friday, 9 March 2007 20:02 (nineteen years ago)

Just wait til Rupert Murdoch buys all the music press.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Saturday, 10 March 2007 00:13 (nineteen years ago)

Who exactly are these "NME indie bands"?? I mean, I know there's the Kaiser Chiefs and Babyshambles, and you guys are mentioning some band called The Horrors (who I've never heard of) but who else is there?

― Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 10 March 2007 20:46 (nineteen years ago)

oh for fuck's sake snrub, just GET ONE (1) NME and you'll see just a fraction of the bullshit mountain we have to deal with here.

― unfished business, Saturday, 10 March 2007 20:49 (nineteen years ago)

You can't get an NME here in Ohio. The only place you could ever get them was the local Borders, and they stopped carrying them 'round 2001 or so.

Also, nme.com doesn't put their reviews online anymore :(

Anybody remember nme.com? Back in about 2000-2001 that was the BEST MUSIC SITE EVER. They had loads of shit from all through the 90s.

― Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 10 March 2007 20:54 (nineteen years ago)

Nothing wrong about the NME these days. Franz Ferdinand are brilliant, for instance.

― Geir Hongro, Saturday, 10 March 2007 20:54 (nineteen years ago)

Geir is wrong, anyway Franz Ferdinand on the cover of NME was years ago now. Now it's The Fratellis, The Horrors, The Shitehawks*
NME.com was awesome back then. It went to shit in a cost cutting exercise sadly. Shortsighted fuckers.

* May be made up.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:03 (nineteen years ago)

Nothing wrong about the NME these days.

Here, just for you, Geir, is NME's recent review of The Twang's single 'Wide Awake':

"First the Kaisers, then The Automatic and now The Twang. On current form, you'd put a fiver on 'super-indie' B-Unique succeeding even if they announced plans to fly Pennie to Mars fuelled by one of Preston's leftover cappucinos.

At first glance these gnarly Midlands upstarts look unlikely superstars. Their wardrobes are hopelessly bereft of the indie nation's current clobber du jour (mock gothic; Day-Glo rave). Their ever-growing fanclub, meanwhile, led by Noel Gallagher and Tom Meighan, suggests a certain laddishness about their disciples. And yet 'Wide Awake' is still the mightiest, most gloriously life-affirming track you'll hear this month. A filthy, cocksure confessional in the best tradition of Shaun Ryder, it finds Phil Etheridge taking drugs, getting jiggy with someone he shouldn't have and waking up in the morning feeling like death. It's a Mike Skinner concept album packed into three epic minutes. "What was I doing with that MILF?" he booms, as swaggering U2-like guitars shimmer by, all blessed with an unmistakable skunk-rock scuzziness.

If 'Wide Awake''s similarity to Flowered Up's 'It's On' (ask your dribbling, saucer-eyed, flower-headed weirdo of an uncle) will delight wheelchair-bound baggy veterans, The Twang are also bringing more of the pilled-up, anything-goes spirit of rave to the party that all the opposition put together. Sorted!"

LET. ME. COUNT. THE. FUCKING. WAYS.

― unfished business, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:07 (nineteen years ago)

I'd rather listen to "it's on".

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:10 (nineteen years ago)

"upstarts".

Everyone's a freaking upstart in the NME.

― everything, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:11 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, and the best bit? It's a tough call, but THIS is the winner:

swaggering U2-like guitars shimmer by, all blessed with an unmistakable skunk-rock scuzziness.

UUUUUUUUH

― unfished business, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:14 (nineteen years ago)

(downloads "Wide Awake"; gives it a couple listens)

This is terrible.

― Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:45 (nineteen years ago)

So you see. You've only just SCRATCHED THE FUCKING SURFACE, dude.

― unfished business, Saturday, 10 March 2007 21:46 (nineteen years ago)

But what does GEIR think?!

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Saturday, 10 March 2007 22:06 (nineteen years ago)

I haven't heard The Twang, but from the description they sound great. Guitar based archetypically British pop/rock with a heavy empasis on songwriting and melodies usually is.

― Geir Hongro, Sunday, 11 March 2007 12:47 (nineteen years ago)

Well, this Twang song is really crap: U2 meets Hard-Fi, at first listen.

― zeus, Sunday, 11 March 2007 13:01 (nineteen years ago)

Mr Twang - 'Wide Awake'

― Mr. Snrub, Sunday, 11 March 2007 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 1483 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.